And woe is us! We're in a lot of trouble!!  Oh my fucking god, I just found out Terry Pratchett died.. Fuck this day. 
Drat. I really liked him a lot.
SAD DAY : ( |
|
|
|
Oh my fucking god, I just found out Terry Pratchett died.. Fuck this day. |
|
|
|
Also we are about to expand our neural cortex into the cloud, and increase the size of the neural cortex a thousand fold (and then again) there is no telling what will happen. The last time we did this as a species, we invented, language, mathematics, agriculture, french, art, music etc etc...
The world is going to change more in the next 50 years than in the last 100-200, and in the next 100 years as much as in the past 500.
The only thing that will stop this is, nuclear war, plague or heat death.
I'm pretty sure those qualify as 'change'... Good one!  Yeah my dog changed when it died.  (when I think of it , humanity , or homo-sapiens may change more in the next 100 years than they have in (insert very large number here) amount of years... 500 years may not be a big enough number, you could say that as soon as super augmented intelligence, and AIs with the capacity of 1000 times the entire human races brain power, and virtual immortality, become a reality, that we would have transcended what we now call human) It's life Jim, but not as we know it. |
|
|
|
Is anyone even working on how we are going to get access to our private keys if our biological bodies are gone and we are walking around inside of the Internet? No one likes an "I had several BTC in my previous world" guy.
Easy. Brainwallet  oh yeah... or that. |
|
|
|
Is anyone even working on how we are going to get access to our private keys if our biological bodies are gone and we are walking around inside of the Internet? No one likes an "I had several BTC in my previous world" guy.
 Brilliant. I think we may have to store them in our virtual asses. |
|
|
|
I agree, it would become something else. It would no longer be anti-inflationary. But if it becomes an integrated part of the world economy to such an extent that governments start seeing it as their god given right to fiddle with it, they might decide to introduce inflation as most central banks today would in a strongly deflationary economy. A "healthy" inflation today is considered to be in the 2-3% range. If inflation goes into minus territory this could have as negative consequences for the economy long term as a strongly inflationary economy. I am not saying that it will happen, just that it's a scenario I can sort of imagine happen in the very very long term.
Fair play. What do you consider to be a long time? say 50 years? Slightly OT here I guess but I think that actually in 50 years time, when this technological revolution has really got its boots on, then the financial system, and the nature of work and value, and debt and inflation and deflation, are going to have to have changed considerably? I do wonder about that, and how the existing financial system, BTC included, and society in general will have to adapt. Just one example of the quandry, in 50 years time, it looks as if people will be able to become immortal in various forms.. one of which would be to live in totally virtual environments once your body has faded away, assuming this is possible and does become a reality , where does work and money and finance fit in then? and..... who pays for the hardware? Without even going to that extreme, I wonder what life expectancy will be in 2065? I also wonder what the state of AI and automation, and nanotechnology will be, and if we will be resource rich? how are all these things going to pan out? Sounds odd, but it is rushing towards humanity like a maglev in a vacume tube. 50-100 years at least. I am not sure if you're jerking my chain, but if you are trying to say that predicting how society will arrange itself so far in the future, then I agree. No I am 100% serious. Also we are about to expand our neural cortex into the cloud, and increase the size of the neural cortex a thousand fold (and then again) there is no telling what will happen. The last time we did this as a species, we invented, language, mathematics, agriculture, french, art, music etc etc... The world is going to change more in the next 50 years than in the last 100-200, and in the next 100 years as much as in the past 500. The only thing that will stop this is, nuclear war, plague or heat death. |
|
|
|
Death is a disease nowadays.
Exactly, Aubrey De Grey could not have put it better. |
|
|
|
Thread retarded again, shit's gonna happen..
smelling incoming pump btw. tbh thinking deeper about it, satoshifanclub is kinda right and i took it a step further: what would happen if tommorow an asteroid hits the earth and kills nearly everything on earth? no bitcoins, no millionairs and we wouldnt even need community consensus for that to happen....?  He is right in that it is technically possible, but he underestimates the obstacles to this happening. However, I can imagine a time in the future where the ruling consensus is that Bitcoin needs to start the printing press again because it has grown too big for its 21 million and many decimal points. But by then Bitcoin has taken off big time and we'll all be dead or millionaires/billionaires. An asteroid could hit the earth. Lightning could strike us randomly. We could be hit by a car. So many ways to die out there. Hence why it is wise not to put all our trust in money, BTC, gold, silver, or anything else but God. Not trying to tick anyone off with this, but it is wise to think about the fact that death is something we will all have to encounter at some point. Strangely, death is something I really don't fear anymore. Sure, the pain doesn't sound fun, but I have peace that there is so much more to look forward to on the "other side" thanks to Jesus. The otherside might turn out to be a russian hard drive. You may have to electronically euthanise yourself to meet you maker in the future, in fact you may have already done so, you may be your maker.... until you reboot in your next form, or "windows version singular" crashes again, and then we have to download you from the angel cloud again. |
|
|
|
Thread retarded again, shit's gonna happen..
smelling incoming pump btw. tbh thinking deeper about it, satoshifanclub is kinda right and i took it a step further: what would happen if tommorow an asteroid hits the earth and kills nearly everything on earth? no bitcoins, no millionairs and we wouldnt even need community consensus for that to happen....? He is right in that it is technically possible, but he underestimates the obstacles to this happening. However, I can imagine a time in the future where the ruling consensus is that Bitcoin needs to start the printing press again because it has grown too big for its 21 million and many decimal points. But by then Bitcoin has taken off big time and we'll all be dead or millionaires/billionaires. Of course he is right on a technical level, (I was just busting his balls and ignoring his point on purpose, because he ignores the point it is not practical in reality) but if this change was to be made, then all that would have to be decided, is what the new name for the new coins would be. Also I can not see why would it ever need to be done? it would surely only be a psychological thing would it not? it is akin to share dilution What would the difference be between 21 million coins at $1 dollar each and 42 million coins at 50 cents each? What would the difference be of a market cap of $21,000,000 and 21 million BTC being valued at $1 each and a $21,000,000 market cap with 42, million coins being worth $0.50 each ? What difference would there be in purchasing power ? If there is a need for "twice as many coins" then what would be the difference between increasing coin supply by x2 and the value of the BTC from doubling? Say the protocol was changed, and it was decided that there would be x2 more coins from this friday, do you think 2 the money in the system would flow in, or do you think that the assumed value/purchasing power would be cut in half ? I can see no good, practical reason raise the amount of coins, say population of planet earth doubles in next 25 years, and everyone uses BTC, then there would not be a shortage, the purchasing power and value of each satoshi would just be valued as more. The only reason would be a psychological. Why would you ever need more? I agree, it would become something else. It would no longer be anti-inflationary. But if it becomes an integrated part of the world economy to such an extent that governments start seeing it as their god given right to fiddle with it, they might decide to introduce inflation as most central banks today would in a strongly deflationary economy. A "healthy" inflation today is considered to be in the 2-3% range. If inflation goes into minus territory this could have as negative consequences for the economy long term as a strongly inflationary economy. I am not saying that it will happen, just that it's a scenario I can sort of imagine happen in the very very long term. Fair play. What do you consider to be a long time? say 50 years? Slightly OT here I guess but I think that actually in 50 years time, when this technological revolution has really got its boots on, then the financial system, and the nature of work and value, and debt and inflation and deflation, are going to have to have changed considerably? I do wonder about that, and how the existing financial system, BTC included, and society in general will have to adapt. Just one example of the quandry, in 50 years time, it looks as if people will be able to become immortal in various forms.. one of which would be to live in totally virtual environments once your body has faded away, assuming this is possible and does become a reality , where does work and money and finance fit in then? and..... who pays for the hardware? Without even going to that extreme, I wonder what life expectancy will be in 2065? (in flesh form) I also wonder what the state of AI and automation, and nanotechnology will be, and if we will be resource rich? how are all these things going to pan out? Sounds odd, but it is rushing towards humanity like a maglev in a vacume tube. |
|
|
|
Thread retarded again, shit's gonna happen..
smelling incoming pump btw. tbh thinking deeper about it, satoshifanclub is kinda right and i took it a step further: what would happen if tommorow an asteroid hits the earth and kills nearly everything on earth? no bitcoins, no millionairs and we wouldnt even need community consensus for that to happen....? He is right in that it is technically possible, but he underestimates the obstacles to this happening. However, I can imagine a time in the future where the ruling consensus is that Bitcoin needs to start the printing press again because it has grown too big for its 21 million and many decimal points. But by then Bitcoin has taken off big time and we'll all be dead or millionaires/billionaires. Of course he is right on a technical level, (I was just busting his balls and ignoring his point on purpose, because he ignores the point it is not practical in reality) but if this change was to be made, then all that would have to be decided, is what the new name for the new coins would be. Also I can not see why would it ever need to be done? it would surely only be a psychological thing would it not? it is akin to share dilution What would the difference be between 21 million coins at $1 dollar each and 42 million coins at 50 cents each? What would the difference be of a market cap of $21,000,000 and 21 million BTC being valued at $1 each and a $21,000,000 market cap, with 42 million coins being worth $0.50 each ? What difference would there be in purchasing power ? If there is a need for "twice as many coins" then what would be the difference between increasing coin supply by x2 and the value of the BTC from doubling? Say the protocol was changed, and it was decided that there would be x2 more coins from this friday, do you think x2 the money in the system would flow in, or do you think that the assumed value/purchasing power would be cut in half ? I can see no good, practical reason to raise the amount of coins, say population of planet earth doubles in next 25 years, and everyone uses BTC, then there would not be a shortage, the purchasing power and value of each satoshi would just be valued as more. The only reason would be a psychological one. Why would you ever need more? |
|
|
|
Wow straight from the troll talking points rebuttal book "Troll being anyone who has a different view to you?"
Fine, you're not a troll, you're just an asshole.
You obviously know 21 million is as concrete as anything in Bitcoin, the fact that the code can change it with consensus is at most a red herring by you. Otherwise you have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how the Bitcoin community works.
Name calling now eh? You are only becoming angry because you believe in the triumph of unbounded hope over reality. I'm just your 'memento mori', reminding you that bitcoin may not make you the millionaire you hope to be. Again, my original point was that the future value of bitcoin is being predicated to a large extent on the 21m cap, a belief based on faith more than reality. You are a bore. Quite simple really... do it, if it is such a given, in reality do it, do it now, make it so... prove what you say. Prove you can make this change and Bitcoin still be Bitcoin, prove it is possible. Otherwise you are in strawman territory arguing semantics. We do not need to prove what already is because it already isIf you want to prove what is not so, then it is down to you to prove it. The beauty of this is, is that all of the tools you need, are available to you right this second. Make it so. Prove you could make this change, and that Bitcoin, will still be Bitcoin, because as has been pointed out to you... it will not be, it will be something other than Bitcoin. Really, please, do it or..... You are wrong. |
|
|
|
If fat ppl and ginger ppl were to face genocide in a country, don't think for one second that other countries wouldn't get involved. That's not how the world works. People would say it's not fair. Before you knew it, the other countries would kill off their own fat ppl and ginger ppl so that they wouldn't have to keep them around either and to make it fair.
To be fair all we would have to do to take care of the gingers is ban sun tan lotion. |
|
|
|
If fat ppl and ginger ppl were to face genocide in a country, don't think for one second that other countries wouldn't get involved. That's not how the world works. People would say it's not fair. Before you knew it, the other countries would kill off their own fat ppl and ginger ppl so that they wouldn't have to keep them around either.
But it would be by consensus - thats the important issue.... It ^^ is never going to happen. That is the important issue. Let us not let reality get in the way of a good idea though. |
|
|
|
Gah, sorry for stirring up the troll-pot  Why the apology? You made a perfectly valid post, I was just questioning one of the fundamental tenets of that post. And apart from being called a troll, nobody has actually proved me wrong yet. Not wrong, just pointless. Here is a video that will explain what you are missing. https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQWhere is that tumbleweed gif when you need it. About summarises your ability to counter with a cogent argument. I have not heard or seen a cogent argument. Provide one please. (ps ha ha) |
|
|
|
Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll.
Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.
As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.
If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.
Troll being anyone who has a different view to you?  My point all along is that the cap is NOT concrete - which you have now agreed with. Yet many of the predictions of grand wealth with bitcoins are predicated on this fallacy. The Pieter Wuille quote was irrelevant for the reason I stated - He is talking about rogue attacks, Im talking about consensual change. You have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how it works with your "21 millionth bitcoin" statement. I have had a better idea.... instead of miners receiving Bitcoin for their work, they simply get "thank you" notes + links to youtube rickrolls Totally doable. Make it so. ...aaaannddd Still nothing. Really, I thought that was a perfectly reasoned argument, totally in line with this discussion. There is nothing to stop the reward being changed to thank you notes and rickrolls is there? So it is a fact then. So it could happen then. So that makes it possible in reality. It makes as much sense as what you are suggesting. You are arguing semantics and you know it. Like I said, lets not faff around in what ifs, this is perfectly testable, do it, make it so. I am sure it will work out fine. While you are at it, you could try running through walls as well (please provide pics) |
|
|
|
Gah, sorry for stirring up the troll-pot Why the apology? You made a perfectly valid post, I was just questioning one of the fundamental tenets of that post. And apart from being called a troll, nobody has actually proved me wrong yet. Not wrong, just pointless. Here is a video that will explain what you are missing. https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ |
|
|
|
Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll.
Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.
As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.
If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.
Troll being anyone who has a different view to you? My point all along is that the cap is NOT concrete - which you have now agreed with. Yet many of the predictions of grand wealth with bitcoins are predicated on this fallacy. The Pieter Wuille quote was irrelevant for the reason I stated - He is talking about rogue attacks, Im talking about consensual change. You have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how it works with your "21 millionth bitcoin" statement. I have had a better idea.... instead of miners receiving Bitcoin for their work, they simply get "thank you" notes + links to youtube rickrolls Totally doable. Make it so. |
|
|
|
Ah ok, simple then.
Off you pop then, get cracking, let me know how it goes.
So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed? No... because I can ignore the obvious too, just like you. Okay, I no longer want to ignore the obvious. Enlighten me. And Im not being smart, If there is an axiom that states that 21M is the oncrete limit, then I want to know. You owe that to me and other bitcoiners. For our future.... I am a bit busy to explain it to you... I just noticed that there is nothing in the laws of my country, to stop the heads of state declaring tomorrow that they have decided to change the laws, and that all ginger people and fat people are no longer allowed on gods green earth, so therefore they have decided all of the non ginger and non fat people need to decide via a referendum today, and then once they have voted "DIE", the fat ginger pigs need to be frog marched at gunpoint to gas chambers by this weekend, men, women and children alike. Sounds plausible.... let us not let reality get in the way of a good idea. (reductio ad absurdum) (like I said, two can play at this game) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
